ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts of key concepts discussed in the preceding chapters of this book. The book discusses what dissent was levelled at the discourse; what form it took, who pioneered it and the conditions in which acts of resistance were most successful. Threat was constructed via reference to the centrality of sovereignty, geographical isolation, Australia's military history particularly past dangers overcome and continued importance of the American alliance in this regard. The discourse was found to be fashioned around specific, historically meaningful representations of threat and identity and it was found to be dominant and dangerous insofar as it legitimated and constituted practices of violence and exclusion. It is pertinent to consider what a less dangerous approach might have looked like had Howard's utterances been different. The conclusive finding was that harnessing hegemony, or undermining the discourse by using the terms of the discourse itself, was the most successful strategy of resistance against this very dominant discourse.
